RWH015：在市场与人生中更明智地下注——与安妮·杜克对话

有趣的是，生活中常常是这些看似毫无关联的意外事物汇聚在一起，创造出某种新颖而独特的东西。

It's interesting how so often in life, it's these unexpected things that don't seem to have any relationship to each other that come together and somehow create something new and fresh.

那是你对认知自举和语言习得的奇特兴趣，还有你所思考的，我们出生时是否天生具备某种语法之类的问题。

That it was your your weird interest in cognitive bootstrapping and the acquisition of language and and the you know, whether whether there's some grammar innate in the mind when we're born or something.

然后这些兴趣又让你偶然地进入了扑克领域，接着你开始理解扑克。

And then that somehow leads you into poker kind of randomly, and then you sort of you understand poker.

我认为莉拉也以一种很少有扑克玩家会具备的方式，教会了你科学地思考。

I think also Lila had kind of taught you to think very scientifically in a way that very few poker players would.

所以你把这些不同的线索融合在一起，然后意外地踏入了金融世界。

So so you're sort of bringing together these different strands, and then you stumble into the the financial world.

因此你能够应用这些方法——这样说有道理吗？

And so you're able to apply it's does does that make any sense?

有一种奇怪、美丽、随机、幸运，

There's something kind of weird and beautiful and sort of random and sort of lucky and

又带点宿命感的东西。

sort of fatal.

确实有很多运气成分。

There's definitely a lot of luck.

确实有很多随机性。

There's definitely a lot of randomness.

我的意思是，回到大卫·爱泼斯坦的观点，你知道，这其中涉及很多广度。

I mean, to harken back to David Epstein, you know, there's a lot of range.

是的。

Yeah.

而且我认为，当人们看我的人生时，我的意思是，他们往往会像你刚才说的那样，觉得我做了很多随机的事情。

And I think that you know, one of the things that I think when people look at my life, I mean, I think they tend to describe it as you just did, which is like, oh, a lot of random things that you were doing.

但当我回望过去时，我会说，我从未做过任何不是在拉同一条线索的事情。

But when I look back at it, I say, I have never done anything which wasn't pulling the exact same thread.

这条线索就是：你是如何学习的？

And that thread is, how are you learning?

你是如何做决定的？

How are you making decisions?

在不确定性下，你如何关闭反馈循环？

How are you closing feedback loops under uncertainty?

因为这正是整个语言问题所在。

Because that's the whole language problem.

对吧？

Right?

这就像是在一个极其不确定的系统中关闭反馈循环，而这里根本不清楚。

It's like closing the feedback loop in this incredibly uncertain system where it's just not clear.

这就像是我指了一只狗。

It's like I pointed a dog.

我是在谈论喘气、吠叫、毛发、爪子、狗本身、动物、哺乳动物？

Am I talking about panting, barking, fur, a paw, the dog itself, an animal, a mammal?

对吧？

Right?

比如思考、睡觉。

Like, thinking, sleeping.

这到底是什么意思？这个小小的存在是如何实际完成这些反馈循环的？

What what what on earth does that mean, and how how does this little being actually manage to close those feedback loops?

对吧？

Right?

这与系统中的约束有关，而这些约束也成为我思考扑克的方式的重要部分——即，你如何限制自己对这个世界的处理方式，以避免在将结果与其发生原因关联时犯下错误，我认为这对决策者来说是个巨大的问题。

And it has to do with constraints in the system that then becomes a big part of the way that I think about poker, which is how do you constrain the way that you're processing that world in order to avoid the mistakes that you might make in mapping, you know, an outcome to why did that outcome occur, which I think is such a huge problem for us as decision makers.

对吧？

Right?

比如，你投资亏了。

Like, you lose on an investment.

是因为运气不好吗？

Was it like, was it just bad luck?

你的假设哪里错了？

Where was your thesis wrong?

你的假设的某个部分错了吗？

Was some part of your thesis wrong?

这两者中的任何一个，其贡献是什么？

What was the contribution of either one of those two things?

我认为这极其困难，而且完全依赖我们自己的判断。

And I think it's incredibly hard and left to our own devices.

我认为我们在这方面做得非常糟糕。

I think we do a very bad job of it.

因此，开始思考这些约束条件，这实际上是语言空间内的解决方案，我们如何将这种解决方案应用到自己的决策中，以最终判断：这是否真实？那就是接受不确定性。

And so starting to think about those constraints, which is really the solution within the language space and how do we take that type of solution and apply it to our own decision making to both say which is this real in the end, it's embracing the uncertainty.

这意味着：我不试图达到100%的确定性，因为我认为那样做是荒谬的。

It's saying, I'm not gonna try to get to a 100% certain because I think that's ridiculous to try to do that.

我们做不到。

We can't do that.

如果这成为我们的目标，我们就会成为非常糟糕的决策者，因为我们没有正视自己作为决策者所处的位置。

And if that's our goal, we're going to be really bad decision makers because we're not acknowledging the position that we're in as decision makers.

因此，我必须做的是接受不确定性，同时也接纳我原有的思维工具。

So instead, what I have to do is embrace the uncertainty and also embrace the mindware that I came in with.

对吧？

Right?

比如，我天生就有一些偏见。

Like, just there are biases that are are innate to me.

这和系统中的噪音是分开的。

That's separate apart from the noise in the system.

对吧？

Right?

噪音就是对不确定性的接纳。

The noise is the embracing of the uncertainty.

然后我知道，我会以一种有偏见的方式来看待世界，这种偏见是相对系统性的。

And then I know that I'm gonna be viewing the world in a biased way that's gonna be relatively systematic.

那么，我该如何建立约束，以便在我所处的决策环境中成为一个好的决策者？

And so how can I create constraint that will then allow me to be a good decision maker within the environment that I have to make decisions?

我不认为在我成年后的生活中，我曾经思考过其他任何事情。

And I don't think that there's anything in my adult life that I've ever I don't think I've thought about anything else.

我知道，比如研究生院和语言习得，这些怎么可能跟扑克有关呢？

And I know it's like, you know, graduate school and language acquisition, how on earth could that possibly relate to poker?

而且，这些又怎么可能跟我的著作、我做的咨询，或者帮助一家SaaS初创公司处理他们正在做的事情联系起来呢？

And how on earth could that that then relate to the books that I've written or the consulting that I've done or helping a a company that's a SaaS startup to, you know, work through the the stuff that they're doing.

哇，这难道不是很多不同的事情吗？

And woah, isn't that a lot of different things?

但不，这其实是完全相同的事情。

But no, it's the exact same thing.

我做的就是完全相同的事情。

I do the exact same thing.

我只是因为生活中一些奇怪的经历，有幸能够思考这个核心问题如何应用于看似非常不同的问题，而这些经历实际上以积极的方式丰富了我对它的理解。

I just have been lucky enough because of weird stuff that's happened in my life to have been able to think about that thing as it applies to very what look like very different problems that I think have really informed that in a good way.

所以，归根结底，我会回过头说，真幸运我生了这场病。

So, you know, in the end, I kind of look back and say, wow, that was really lucky that I got sick.

但失去与莉拉共度的二十年，并不是什么幸运的事。

It wasn't lucky that I lost two decades with Lila.

这是我的错。

That my fault.

如果没发生那件事，我就不会那样反应，也不会那样做。

And had that not happened, that would you know, I would not have reacted that way and done that.

但就其他所有方面而言，这真是太幸运了。

But in terms of everything else, it was incredibly lucky.

是的。

Yeah.

我记得有一次我问埃德·索普，你是如何把生活当作一场游戏的。

I remember Ed Thorpe once when I asked him how how you approach life as a game.

他说，你看。

He said, well, look.

有些东西，比如你的DNA，就像是你拿到的牌。

There's the there's the stuff like your DNA that's just like the hand that you're dealt.

而另一些则是你关于如何打这张牌所做的决定，比如是否接种疫苗、是否做年度体检、是否锻炼、是否健康饮食。

And then there are the decisions you make about how to play it, like whether you get vaccinated, whether you have your annual checkup, whether you exercise, whether you eat well.

听起来一旦听到就非常合乎逻辑且显而易见，但其实并不那么明显。

It sounds so logical and obvious once you hear it, but it's not that obvious.

我们做不到。

We don't.

我们在这方面太差了。

It's like we're so bad at it.

是的。

Yeah.

所以我其实想问问你，你提到过一个人的名字，在你的扑克世界里人人都知道，但对我们许多听众来说，他可能并不熟悉，那就是埃里克·塞德尔。

And so I wanted to ask you actually about someone whose name you mentioned, which in in your world of poker, everyone will know, but for many of our listeners, he won't be familiar, which is Eric Seidel.

因为当你刚开始接触扑克时，你哥哥身边有一群非凡的扑克玩家在纽约。

So because your brother had this extraordinary group of of poker players around him in New York when you were coming

成长

up

在这一行里

in I the game

我16岁时认识了埃里克·塞德尔。

met Eric Seidel when I was 16 years old.

太棒了。

Amazing.

所以对于不了解的人，我说实话，我对扑克几乎一无所知。

So so for people who don't know, I mean, Seidel I know so little about poker.

我都说不上来。

Can't even tell you.

我都不好意思承认。

I'm embarrassed to admit.

但据我所知，他赢得了九个世界扑克系列赛的冠军手镯，

But he, as I understand it, won nine world series of poker bracelets and

是的。

Yeah.

他简直是个怪物。

He's something ridiculous.

是的。

Yeah.

到目前为止，他作为玩家赚了大约四千万美元，而且在成为职业扑克玩家之前还做过股票交易员。

He made something like $40,000,000 as a player so far, and was also a stock exchange trader before he became a professional poker player.

你以前写过，他在某种程度上是教你何为追求理性思考的人，你也说过你对他的智慧着迷。

So you've written before that he was in some ways the person who taught you what it means to strive to be a rational thinker, and and you've also said that you have a crush on his intellect.

所以我想知道，你能否向我们解释一下，你是如何从这个看似不相关的领域中学到如何更理性地思考的？

So I wondered if you could explain to us what you learned in this sort of unlikely field about how to think more rationally.

西德尔教会了你什么？

What did Seidel teach you?

埃里克·西德尔是一位了不起的扑克玩家，真的非常出色。

So Eric Seidel is an amazing poker player, like, really incredible.

我想人们需要意识到他了不起的一点是，首先，扑克中有很多短期的运气成分。

And, you know, one of the things I think that people need to realize that's so amazing about him is, first of all, there there's a lot of short term luck in poker.

比如，有些人某一年表现特别好，但之后就再也没能取得好成绩了。

So there are people who come and they have like a great year, you know, and then they just sort of never do well after that, for example.

而且，我觉得部分原因是人们看穿了他们，而他们自己却没有应对策略，我想是这样。

And, you know, partly I think because people figure them out and they don't have a strategy to figure them out, you know, back out, I guess.

你在很多运动中都能看到这种情况。

And you see that in in a lot of sports.

有人突然做出一些非常不寻常的事情。

Someone comes in and does something really unusual.

一开始他们表现得非常好，但随后对手们看穿了他们。

At first, they do really well, and then their opponents figure them out.

如果他们没有应对方法，那他们的表现就不会特别好了。

And if they don't have a response, it's you know, they're not gonna do particularly well.

但游戏本身也发生了变化。

But also the game itself has changed.

对吧？

Right?

所以有很多人有一年表现特别出色，但结果只是运气好而已。

So there's lots of people who will have a great year and then it turns out they just got lucky.

但即使他们没有走运，而且在游戏变化、新人涌入时确实不够出色，他们能否适应并在这些新环境中表现良好呢？

But even if they didn't get lucky and they really weren't great for that time as the game changes, as new people come in, are they are they able to adjust and do well in those new environments?

这一点我们已经看到，尤其是在深度学习引入之后。

And that's something that we've seen, you know, particularly with the introduction of some deep learning.

比如，在双陆棋或国际象棋中，过去被认为是正确的策略，我们现在发现人工智能通常会建议你采取截然不同的、更具攻击性的做法。

You know, the strategy that used to be considered correct in backgammon, for example, or chess, what we're finding is that AIs are telling you to do very different things generally to be more aggressive.

然后，当新一代玩家吸收了这些经验后，像你这样从事这项运动很久的人，还能否调整回来，改变自己的打法和应对方式？这非常困难。

And then and then as the new generation comes in and they've sort of metabolized those lessons, are you as someone who's been doing this for a very long time able to adjust back and change your game and response, which is very difficult to do?

而在这里，你有埃里克·赛德尔，他已经从事这项运动四十年了。

And so here you have Eric Seidel who's been doing this now for four decades.

年复一年，他始终是顶尖的网球选手之一，也是顶尖的扑克玩家之一。

And it just year after year after year, one of the top tennis one of the top poker players.

我记得你讲过一个故事，说你去找他，抱怨某场比赛。

And I remember you telling a story about going to him and complaining about some game.

我想你用的词是‘坏牌’，就是你只是运气不好。

I think that the term you used was a bad beat where you just sort of got unlucky.

当你抱怨自己运气不好时，他是怎么回应的？

And how did he respond when you complained about your bad luck?

嗯。

Yeah.

这就是我认为他如此出色的原因之一，因为扑克是一个非常艰难的环境，其中运气成分很大。

So this is one of the things that I make think makes him so great, which is so it's it's really you know, poker is a really tough environment because there is a lot of luck.

你总会遇到一些情况，明明你是绝对的大热门，却还是输了。

And you are going to have situations where you are absolutely a a gigantic favorite and you're gonna lose.

顺便说一句，有时候你以为自己运气差，但实际上并没有。

And by the way, sometimes you're gonna think that you got unlucky, but you actually didn't.

但那是另一回事了，我的意思是，这正是他试图说明的问题。

But that's a whole I mean, this is sort of the issue of what he was trying to get at.

于是我去找了他。

So I came to him.

那是我第一次打进决赛桌之一。

This was like this was like one of the first final tables that I ever made.

我记得我用一对杰克加注，那个来自哥斯达黎加的家伙，加斯，把他的所有筹码都推了进去，这些是我对他记得的事情。

And I remember I raised with two Jacks, and this guy, Gus, who was from Costa Rica, these are the things I remember about him, Moved all of his chips in.

如果我赢了这手牌，我将成为 tournament 剩下六人中的筹码领先者。

And this was either if I win the hand here, I'm gonna be the chip leader in the tournament with six people left.

如果我输了，我就直接出局了。

And if I lose, I'm gonna be out six.

所以这是一次非常大的波动。

So this is a a pretty big swing here.

于是他把所有筹码都推了进去，我思考了一下。

And so he moves all his chips in, and I thought about it.

我真的花了很长时间考虑，因为杰克这种牌算是中等强度的手牌。

And, you know, I really thought about it for a long time because Jack's is like sort of a middle of, you know, middle of the road hand.

最后我选择了跟注。

And I ended up calling.

我真的觉得，他并没有拿到一手很强的牌。

I really thought I really just decided that that he didn't have a great hand.

他拿的是两张九。

And he had two nines.

所以为了说明情况，我赢这个底池的概率大约是82%，略低于这个数字。

So just to set the stage, gonna win that pot around 82% of the time just shy of that.

但他赢了这手牌。

And he won the hand.

这是我所经历过的最大的舞台。

And this was the biggest stage I'd ever been on.

这是我赌过最多的钱。

It was the most money I had ever played for.

我的意思是，这真的非常重要。

I mean, this was a really big deal.

你想想，我以前输过这样的牌吗？

You know, had I lost hands like that before?

当然输过。

Sure.

但从未在如此重要的时刻输过。

But never never when it mattered so much.

所以我离开那张桌子时，真的非常沮丧。

So I walked away from that table and I was really just really upset.

我走到他面前，你知道，我只是向他抱怨。

And I went to him, you know, and I just want I was just complaining to him.

我当时说：你能相信吗？

I was like, can you believe this?

我做了个绝佳的决定，可这个傻瓜却拿着两张九牌跟注， blah blah blah。

Like, I made such a great call and this idiot moved in with two nines and blah blah blah blah.

你知道，这整个事情都是关于我有多倒霉。

You know, it's this whole thing about how unlucky I was.

他直接打断我，问：你到底想说什么？

And he just stopped me and said, is there a question here?

你知道，我当时很惊讶，因为你会以为，大多数人会说：我真替你难过。

And, you know, I was taken aback because like you would expect, most people will be like, I am so sorry.

那是运气好的人。

That's someone lucky.

我真为你感到难过。

I feel so bad for you.

这对你真的很重要。

It really mattered to you.

我的意思是，我想我当时大概二十多岁，二十六七岁吧，反正还年轻。

Like, I mean, I think I was, like, 20 I was 26 or 27, something like I mean, I was young.

你知道吗？

You know?

哦，是啊，你知道的？

And, oh, it's so you know?

这通常是你会期待的反应。

And that's normally what you would expect.

但他却直接问：有什么问题吗？

But he was just like, is there a question?

我只是想，这是什么？

And I just thought it was like, what?

他说：如果没有问题，我不想听这些。

He goes, I don't wanna hear about it if there's not a question.

我不在乎你运气不好。

Like, I don't care that you got unlucky.

我运气也不好。

I get unlucky too.

我也经常要面对用两张杰克对两张九输掉的情况。

And I have to deal with losing with two jacks against two nines all the time also.

我当然不想自己接手你这些情绪垃圾。

I certainly don't wanna take on your emotional trash about it myself.

谈论这件事有什么意义？

And what's the point of talking about it?

你做了一个很棒的决定，但输了。

You made a great call and lost.

谁在乎？

Who cares?

你会改变自己做的任何事吗？

Would you have changed anything about what you did?

你觉得你判断错了吗？

Do you think you got the read wrong?

在我看来，你一切都做对了。

It sounds to me like you did everything right.

那我们为什么还要谈这个？

So why are we even talking about this?

你知道的。

You know?

而且你知道，就像，呃。

And it you know, it's like, ugh.

对吧？

Right?

一开始，我真的很生气。

And at first, I was like really mad.

但后来我意识到，他说得完全对。

And then I realized, no, he's totally right.

我的意思是，这才是关键。

Like, I mean, this is the thing.

如果这真的只是运气不好，谁在乎呢？

It's like, if if it really was just bad luck, who cares?

这关乎接受这种不确定性。

This is about embracing that uncertainty.

对吧？

Right?

如果你有问题，你知道的，他跟我说过。

If you have a question you know, and he said that to me.

如果你有问题，如果你觉得你不该打那个电话，或者不该打开，或者该多打开一会儿，或者该早点搬进去，或者该做点别的，那我愿意整天跟你讨论。

If you have a question, if you think maybe you shouldn't have called there or maybe you shouldn't have opened or maybe you should have opened for more or maybe you should have moved in then for maybe you should have done something different, then I will talk to you about that all day.

但如果你只是在抱怨扑克之神降下厄运对你不公，我根本不关心，因为这对你未来没有任何帮助。

But if all you're talking about is that the poker gods came down and were mean to you, I don't care because it doesn't help you going forward.

让我们短暂休息一下

Let's take a quick break

听听今天赞助商的消息。

and hear from today's sponsors.

当你经营一家小企业时，招聘到合适的人才至关重要。

When you're running a small business, hiring the right person can make all the difference.

合适的员工能提升你的团队，提高生产力，将你的业务推向新的高度。

The right hire can elevate your team, boost your productivity and take your business to the next level.

但找到这样的人本身可能就像一份全职工作。

But finding that person can feel like a full time job in itself.

这就是LinkedIn招聘的用武之地。

That's where LinkedIn jobs comes in.

他们的新AI助手通过为你匹配真正符合你需求的顶尖候选人，消除了招聘中的猜测成分。

Their new AI assistant takes the guesswork out of hiring by matching you with top candidates who actually fit what you're looking for.

它不再让你翻阅大量简历，而是根据你的标准筛选申请人，并突出显示最匹配的人选，帮你节省数小时时间，在合适的人选出现时快速行动。

Instead of sifting through piles of resumes, it filters applicants based on your criteria and highlights the best matches, saving you hours and helping you move fast when the right person comes along.

最棒的是，这些优秀候选人已经存在于LinkedIn上。

The best part is that those great candidates are already on LinkedIn.

事实上，通过LinkedIn招聘的员工至少留任一年的可能性比通过主要竞争对手招聘的员工高出30%。

In fact, employees hired through LinkedIn are 30% more likely to stick around for at least a year compared to those hired through the leading competitor.

一次就招对人。

Hire right the first time.

免费在linkedin.com/studybill发布你的职位，然后推广它以使用LinkedIn的新AI助手，更轻松快捷地找到顶尖候选人。

Post your job for free at linkedin.com/studybill, then promote it to use LinkedIn jobs new AI assistant, making it easier and faster to find top candidates.

免费发布职位请访问linkedin dot com slash studybill。

That's linkedin dot com slash studybill to post your job for free.

条款和条件适用。

Terms and conditions apply.

想象一下，借助真正理解你客户的科技来扩展你的业务。

Imagine scaling your business with technology that understands your customers, literally.

这就是Alexa和AWS人工智能背后的故事。

That's the story behind Alexa and AWS AI.

每天，Alexa在17种语言中处理超过10亿次交互，同时将客户摩擦降低40%。

Every day, Alexa processes over 1,000,000,000 interactions across 17 languages, all while reducing customer friction by 40%.

这不仅仅是让生活更便捷，更是改变客户互动方式并创造新的收入来源。

It's not just about making life easier, it's also about transforming customer engagement and generating new revenue streams.

在幕后，AWS人工智能驱动着70多个专用模型协同工作，实现自然对话，证明了企业如何以自信和安全的方式规模化部署人工智能。

Behind the scenes, AWS AI powers more than 70 specialized models working together to create natural conversations, proving how enterprises can deploy AI at scale with confidence and security.

Alexa的人工智能能力在亚马逊庞大的运营中经过实战检验，实现了可衡量的大规模实际影响。

Alexa's AI capabilities were battle tested across Amazon's massive operations, delivering real measurable impact at scale.

这些相同的创新现在为其他企业提供了经过验证的框架，以提升效率、解锁新的收入来源并获得持久的市场优势。

These same innovations now give other businesses a proven framework to boost efficiency, unlock new revenue streams and gain a lasting market edge.

在aws.com/ai/rstory了解Alexa的故事。

Discover the Alexa story at aws.com/ai/rstory.

网址是aws.com/ai/rstory。

That's aws.com/ai/rstory.

你的比特币持有量越多，面临的挑战就越复杂。

The more your Bitcoin holdings grow, the more complex your challenges become.

最初简单的自托管，如今已涉及家庭传承规划、复杂的安保决策，以及一个错误就可能损失数代财富的严峻局面。

What started as a simple self custody now involves family legacy planning, sophisticated security decisions, and navigating situations where a single mistake could cost generations of wealth.

标准服务并未为这些高风险的现实情况而设计。

Standard services weren't built for these high stakes realities.

因此，长期投资者选择Unchained Signature——专为认真持有比特币的人士提供的高端私人客户服务，提供专业指导、稳健托管和持久的合作关系。

That's why long term investors choose Unchained Signature, a premium private client service for serious Bitcoin holders who want expert guidance, resilient custody, and an enduring partnership.

使用Signature服务，你将拥有专属的客户经理，他们了解你的目标，并在每一步为你提供帮助。

With Signature, you're paired with your own dedicated account manager, someone who understands your goals and helps you every step of the way.

你将享受全方位的入职服务、当日紧急支持、个性化教育、降低交易费用，以及优先参与独家活动和功能的权益。

You get white glove onboarding, same day emergency support, personalized education, reduced trading fees, and priority access to exclusive events and features.

Unchained的协作托管模式旨在为那些希望自行保管私钥的人士，提供与全球顶级比特币托管机构同等的安全保障。

Unchained's collaborative custody model is designed to provide the same security posture as the world's biggest Bitcoin custodians, but for those who prefer to hold their own keys.

了解更多关于Unchained Signature的信息，请访问unchained.com/preston。

Learn more about Unchained signature at unchained.com/preston.

结账时使用代码 Preston 10，即可享受首年10%折扣。

Use code Preston 10 at checkout to get 10% off your first year.

比特币不仅仅关乎一生。

Bitcoin isn't just for life.

它关乎世代传承。

It's for generations.

好的。

Alright.

回到节目。

Back to the show.

这是一个美好的故事。

It's a beautiful story.

这其中有着深刻的内涵。

There's there's great there's great depth in that.

我想再提一下你刚才提到的一点，我觉得你提到过，如果你没听错的话，你赢那手牌的概率是82%。

I wanted to pick up on one thing that that you mentioned there where I think you said there was an 82% probability that you were gonna win that hand if I if I heard correctly.

81.5。

81.5.

多年来，我采访过许多伟大的投资者，比如查理·芒格、埃德·索普、霍华德·马克斯、比尔·米勒、乔·格林布拉特，这些人总是以概率的角度思考问题。

And I've interviewed a lot of great investors over the years, people like Charlie Munger and Ed Thorpe and Howard Marks and Bill Miller, Joe Greenblatt, these guys who just think constantly in terms of probabilities.

他们总是将未来视为一系列概率的分布，并为这些不同的可能性分配几率。

They're always looking at the future as a distribution of probabilities and they're assigning odds to those different probabilities.

我曾问过霍华德·马克斯，像我这样天生不擅长这种思维方式的投资者，是否能学会概率性思考。

And I once asked Howard Marks if it was possible for an investor like me who's not really wired that way to learn to think probabilistically.

我当时有点失望。

I was kind of disappointed.

他回答说：‘嗯，大概不行。’

He was like, Yeah, no, probably not.

我对这个问题很感兴趣：第一，学会概率性思考有多重要；第二，你是否真的认为我们能在这方面变得更好。

And I was interested in this whole question of, a, how important it is to learn to think in terms of probabilities, and b, whether you actually think that is something that we can become much better at.

是的。

Yes.

我认为我得不同意霍华德·马克斯的观点。

I think I'm I'm gonna disagree with Howard Marx here.

所以我认为我有两点不同意见。

So I think I'm gonna disagree on two counts.

顺便说一下，我非常欣赏霍华德·马克斯。

And by the way, love Howard Marks.

他超级、超级聪明。

He's super, super smart.

而且实际上，如果我这样表达的话，他可能并不会不同意我的看法。

And actually, he may not disagree with me when I phrase it this way.

我只是想说，我永远学不会

Let me just meant me that I could never learn to

想，不。

think No.

但我认为不。

But I think no.

因为霍华德和我实际上讨论过这个问题，我认为在这里他会同意我的观点，因为我将重新表述它。

Because Howard and I have actually talked about this and I think here he's gonna agree with me because I'm gonna reframe it.

我认为通过这种重新表述，他会和我站在同一立场上。

And I think with the reframe, he's gonna be on the same page as me.

好的，这是第一点，你正在以概率的方式思考。

Okay, here's thing number one, you are thinking probabilistically.

所以我认为理解这一点非常重要。

So I think this is really important to understand.

事实上，最近有个人对我说：‘你谈的是概率和期望值这些东西，但这些不适用于择优，因为那是一次性的决定，你只需听从内心之类的。’

So I actually had someone recently say to me like, oh, you're talking about probabilities and expected value and those kinds of things, but that doesn't apply to merit because that's like a one time decision where you just gotta go with your heart or whatever.

我的回应是：‘难道你会随便走上街头，随机娶一个人吗？’

And my response was, oh, do you just walk out onto the street and marry someone at random?

当然，答案是否定的。

And of course, the answer is no.

这是因为你在对未来进行预测。

And it's because you are making a forecast of the future.

你在说，我从约会过的人身上学到了什么？

You are saying, what have I learned from people that I dated?

我对自己的认知模型是什么？

What is my model of myself?

我对这个人的认知模型是什么？

What is my model of this person?

而且，是的，即使你不会一遍又一遍地重复这个决定，你仍然在进行预测。

And, yeah, just because you're not going to repeat the decision over and over again, obviously, you're still doing a forecast.

你仍然在想：在考虑到我所剩时间的限制——比如你的生理时钟、你的价值观等等——的情况下，我认为和这个人结婚的预期价值更高，而不是继续寻找其他人。

You're still saying, I think my expected value is higher if I marry this person given the constraints of the time that I have, maybe your biological clock, so on and so forth, what your values are, you know, in comparison to continuing to search for other people.

所以，即使如此，抱歉，安妮，我打断你一下。

So even if you even sorry, Annie, to cut you off.

即使你看看，我有个亲近的亲戚，是个屡次出轨的人，他给自己惹上了麻烦，还在赌运气。

Even if you look at the you know, I had a close relative who was a serial philanderer who got himself in trouble, and he's playing the odd.

他想的是：我被发现、这件事毁掉我的家庭的概率有多大？

He's like, what are what are the odds that I'm gonna get caught and this is gonna ruin my family?

嗯，是的。

Well, yes.

这会是一个很好的反面例子，说明如何进行概率性思考，但完全正确。

That would be a good negative example of thinking probabilistically, but exactly right.

我记得小时候警告过他，说：你看。

And I remember warning him as a kid and saying, look.

如果你一直这么做，迟早会被抓住。

You're gonna get caught if you do it enough time.

他当时

And he was

说：不会。

like, no.

不会。

No.

不会。

No.

不。

No.

不。

No.

然后他被抓了，毁了整个家庭。

And then he got caught and it ruined his his family.

希望你能从中学到教训。

And hopefully you learn from that.

所以，关键就是，我希望如此。

So so that's the thing is like I hope so.

即使你没有有意识地这么想，你所做的每一个决定本质上都是概率性的。

Even if you don't think you're doing it explicitly, literally every single decision you make is probabilistic.

因为这是一种预测。

It's because it's a forecast.

这是在信息不完整的情况下做出的预测。

It's a forecast made under conditions where you don't have all the facts.

与所有可知的事物相比，你通常知道得非常少，而且结果会受到运气的影响。

You generally know very little in comparison to all there is to be known, and there's gonna be the influence of luck on the outcome.

对吧？

Right?

这确实是真的。

And that's true.

你看。

Like, look.

当你决定一条去上班的路线时，这其实是一种预测。

When you decide a particular route that you're gonna take to work, it's a forecast.

我觉得这条路能让我在预计的时间内到达工作地点，或者你更看重风景，比如 scenic route。

I think this is gonna get me to work in in the time that it's gonna take me to get there, or maybe you value scenic, you know, the scenic route.

所以你说，这条路更有可能让我看到更多风景，相比起我必须到达的时间。

And so you're saying this is more likely to let me see lots of scenery in comparison with when I need to be there.

如果路上发生事故，你决定改道，那就是一个期望值的计算。

And then if there's an accident on the road and you decide to exit to take a different route, that's an expected value calculation.

你正在以概率的方式思考：如果我下高速，虽然通常这条路会花更长时间，但我更有可能准时到达。

You are thinking probabilistically, if I exit, even though normally this would take longer, there's a higher probability I'm going to get there on time.

所以我认为第一点是，我们必须摒弃这样的观念：如果你没有明确地这样做，你就不是在进行概率性思考，因为每一个决策本质上都是概率性的，因为世界本身就是概率性的。

So I think that's number one is that we have to reject the idea that if you're not doing it explicitly that you aren't thinking probabilistically because every decision is a probabilistic decision just by its nature because the world is probabilistic.

这就是我们做决定的方式。

That is how we decide.

所以，我想先说这一点。

So that's the first thing that I just wanna say there.

现在，试图将这些事情明确化会让你做得更好，因为它会帮助你建立良好的反馈循环。

Now the act of trying to make these things explicit will make you better at it because what it will start to do is allow you to create good feedback loops.

记住，这是我痴迷的事情。

Remember, this is my obsession.

我们该如何开始建立良好的反馈循环呢？

How do we start to create good feedback loops?

好吧，我来举一个我合作过的一家公司的例子，他们就存在这种隐性与显性的问题。

Well, so I'll give you an example from a company that I work with that had this implicit explicit thing.

我是第一轮资本合伙公司的决策科学特别合伙人。

So I'm a special partner focused on decision science at First Round Capital Partners.

所以有一家种子阶段的公司。

So there is an a seed stage company.

当我刚开始与他们合作时，我们决定改变他们投票流程中的某些方面，以更好地契合我们对决策科学的理解。

So when I first started working with them, there were certain things about their voting process that we decided that we really should change to fit with what we know about the science of decision making.

其中之一是在他们的决策过程中加入一些非常明确的预测。

And one of them was to include some very explicit forecasts in what they were in their decision.

我们希望纳入的一个预测是：你正在考虑的这家公司成功完成A轮融资的概率是多少。

So one of the forecasts that we wanted to include was what's the probability that the company that you're currently considering is going to successfully raise a series a.

而合伙人给我的反馈是：我们根本不会考虑这个问题，因为我们关心的是它是否能以十亿美元的价格退出。

Now the pushback that I got from the partners was, well, we don't even think about that because what we care about is is it going to exit for a billion dollars?

于是我退了一步。

And so I rolled it back again.

这其实隐含在决策中，但我们是否应该把它明确化？

This is this is it implicit in the decision and should we make it explicit?

因为我觉得这在决策中是隐含的。

Because I felt it was implicit in the decision.

我通过问他们来得出这个结论：一旦你们在种子轮投资了一家公司，你们有没有遇到过一家没有成功完成A轮融资却成为基金回报者的公司？

And the way that I got to that was to say to them, well, once you funded a company at seed, have you ever had a company that was a fund returner that didn't successfully fund at series a?

他们说：没有，我们没有。

They said, no, we have not.

我说：那么这就是决策中的一部分。

And I said, then it's in the decision.

这暗示了你们在决定投资这家公司时，其中一个预测就是它会以一定的概率成功完成A轮融资，对吧？

It's implied that one of the predictions that you're making when you decide to invest in this company will successfully above a certain rate, right, fund at series a.

所以我们现在将这一点明确纳入了决策流程。

So we now made that an explicit part of the decision process.

他们必须做出这个预测。

So they have to make that forecast.

现在这促使他们以概率的方式思考那些实际上属于决策组成部分的事情。

And now what that does is it gets them to think about things that are actually part of the decision in a probabilistic way.

我们现在可以关闭这些反馈循环了，因为当你多次这样做时，你就能开始看出，这些预测到底有多准确？

We can now close those feedback loops because you do that enough times, you can start to see, well, how good are a predictor?

你们的预测比随机猜测更好吗？

Are you better than random?

知道哪家公司一进来，就能在下一轮或下下一轮获得融资。

Knowing which company when it comes in the door is going to fund it the next round or the round after that.

我们实际上已经开始能够关闭这些反馈循环了。

And we've actually started to be able to close those feedback loops.

他们的预测比随机猜测更好。

They are better than random.

他们在这方面相当出色。

They are quite good at it.

这与经验相关。

It maps to experience.

你越有经验，就越擅长预测这一点。

The more experienced you are, the better you are at predicting that.

这对初级合伙人非常有利，因为他们看到资深合伙人的预测能力更强。

And that does great things for the junior partners because they see that the senior partners are better prediction.

他们开始试图理解资深合伙人这样预测的理由，从而提升了自己预测这些事情的能力。

They start to try to understand their rationale for that, which then improves their ability to forecast those things.

结果是，他们的能力变得越来越好。

And what happens is they they get better.

那么他们做得完美吗？

Now are they perfect at it?

当然不是。

Of course not.

他们并不完美，但比随便乱猜要强得多。

They're not perfect at it, but they're better than if you just threw darts.

而这正是我们开始在投资中不断打磨、反复积累优势的地方。

And that is you know, this is where we start to get those edges that we can grind over and over and over again in investing.

我就是不接受这种说法。

I just don't accept it.

我说你要用概率思维思考，所以让我们开始明确起来。

I say you are thinking probabilistically, so let's start making explicit.

如果你开始明确地这样做，你会变得更好。

And if you start to do that explicitly, you will get better.

你会做到完美吗？

Will you be perfect?

不会。

No.

有些人是否比其他人更自然地以明确的方式这样思考？

Do some people think this way more naturally than other people in an explicit way?

当然。

Sure.

但你每一点进步都会对你的结果产生重大影响。

But every little bit that you improve is gonna really matter to you for your outcomes.

你在扑克中培养的技能，在投资领域中有多大的可转移性？

How transferable have you found the skills that you developed in poker when it comes to the investing world?

这在多大程度上是相同的事情，又在多大程度上是完全不同的游戏？

How much is it the same thing and how much is it actually a different type of game?

是的。

Yeah.

这实际上涉及到我博士研究的一点内容。

So this actually gets into a little bit of what my doctoral research is about.

关于从一个领域到另一个领域的训练迁移，有着悠久的历史，而这段历史相当令人失望。

So there's a whole history of question about transfer of training from one domain to another, and the history is pretty dismal.

这可以追溯到20世纪初，当时教育的理念是，如果我教你做困难的数学题，比如三角学，它会帮助你在所有其他领域成为更好的思考者。

It actually starts way back in the 1900 early nineteen hundreds where the idea around education was, like, if I teach you if you do hard math problems like trigonometry, it will help you to be a better thinker in all other domains.

但事实证明，这并不正确。

And it turns out that that actually isn't true.

但有一些研究，始于丰和尼兹贝特，探讨了一种确实可以迁移的特定内容，即统计概念。

But there's some work that sort of begins with Phong and Nizbet on a very specific thing that does transfer, which is statistical concepts.

比如大数定律就是一个例子。

So something like the law of large numbers as an example.

所以，如果我教你将大数定律应用于某个特定领域，你可以实现非常广泛的迁移，让你在脑海中形成这个概念，理解大数的重要性，并将其迁移到其他领域。

So if I teach you about the law law of large numbers as applied to a particular domain, I can get very far transfer where you will now sort of have this concept in your head, you'll understand that large numbers matter and it will transfer into other domains.

因此，我认为这对我在扑克中的帮助特别大，因为扑克中涉及大量统计概念，而这些概念我也在认知心理学中学过。

So that's the thing that I think was so helpful for me in poker was there's a whole bunch of statistical concepts, which also I had learned in cognitive psychology.

对吧？

Right?

因为你一直在处理数据。

Because you're having to work with data all the time.

所以你已经习惯用这种方式思考了。

And so you're thinking in that way already.

然后在扑克中，你开始需要思考像基础概率这样的概念。

And then in poker, have to start to think about things like base rates, for example.

对吧？

Right?

基础概率就是某件事在与我现在所处情境相似的情况下发生的频率。

And a base rate is just how often doesn't something happen in a situation similar to the one that I'm currently considering.

所以我说，普通玩家会玩他们25%的两张牌组合并保留它们。

So that's where I say like the average player will play 25% of their two card combinations and hold them.

对吧？

Right?

这为我提供了一个起点。

So that helps me with a starting point.

而基础概率这个概念实际上非常容易迁移。

And that concept of base rates actually transfers very well.

大数定律，在扑克中变得非常重要。

The law of large numbers, which becomes very important in poker.

我不想去思考某一手牌发生了什么。

I don't wanna think about what happened on a particular hand.

我需要足够的样本量才能对此做出判断。

I need enough reps to be able to say something about it.

这类事情，你通过这些统计思维模型和统计概念来看待世界的方式，能够非常非常有效地迁移。

Those types of things, the way that you sort of view the world through these kind of statistical mental models and statistical concepts transfers really, really well.

所以我认为这对我而言非常有帮助，因为一旦你开始这样思考，一切看起来都像扑克了。

So so I think that that's actually been incredibly helpful to me because everything looks a little poker like when you start to think that way.

另一点是，我认为根据投资类型的不同，这种迁移实际上是相当接近的。

Then the other thing is that I just think that depending on the type of investing, it's actually relatively near transfer.

我们谈论近迁移和远迁移，也就是将一个领域映射到另一个领域的难易程度。

So we think about near transfer and far transfer, which is just how easily can you map one domain onto another.

如果你拿扑克和期权交易来比较，那就是相对接近的迁移。

If you take something like poker and options trading, now you're talking about relatively near transfer.

它们彼此之间非常非常相似。

They're very, very, very similar to each other.

事实上，我相信你一定知道，像Susquehanna International Group这样的大型期权交易公司会强制交易员玩扑克，因为这两者实在太相似了。

In fact, as I'm sure you're aware, there large options trading firms like Susquehanna International Group that actually force their traders to play poker because those are so similar.

当然，当你进入种子轮风险投资这类领域时，你就开始进入一个更远的领域了。

Now, obviously, when you get into something like seed stage venture capital, you're starting to get into a much further domain.

但这些统计概念仍然适用。

But these statistical concepts still apply.

因此，我发现这对我帮助极大。

And so I have found it to be incredibly helpful.

关键在于不要把它看作类比转移，即试图从扑克中提取类比并套用到其他领域，我认为这种方式转移效果并不好。

It's just a matter of not thinking about it as analogical transfer, like you're trying to take analogies from poker and lay them onto other areas, which I don't think transfers particularly well.

这并不太管用。

I'd I that doesn't work very well.

但更应思考的是，有哪些统计学上的教训、基础和概念，可以被迁移到你所思考的任何事情中。

But thinking more about what it what are the sort of statistical lessons and underpinnings and concepts that you would then transfer to anything that you're thinking about.

让我感到非常惊讶的是，许多伟大的投资者都是认真的游戏玩家。

It's really striking to me how many of the great investors have been very serious game players.

我记得约翰·邓普顿爵士曾经告诉我，他在大萧条时期靠打扑克的赢钱完成了大学学业。

And I I'm thinking I remember sir John Templeton told me once that he put himself through college during the great depression with his winnings from poker.

我的意思是，正如你刚才提到的爱德·索普。

I mean, Ed Thorpe, as you just mentioned.

一位天才赌徒，他找到了击败赌场二十一点的方法，后来又攻克了百家乐，甚至轮盘赌，这简直不可思议。

Brilliant gambler who figured out how to beat the casino at Blackjack and then then baccarat and even even roulette, which is crazy.

是的。

Yes.

巴菲特和芒格热衷于打桥牌。

Buffett and Munger passionate about bridge.

我记得马里奥·加贝利曾经告诉我，他11岁时在一家高尔夫俱乐部当球童，靠打牌赢钱，因为人们以为一个11岁的孩子不懂这些。

I remember Mario Gabelli once telling me that when he was 11 years old, he was a caddy at a golf club and he made money beating people at cards because they assumed an 11 year old wouldn't know what he was doing.

实际上，二十多年前，彼得·林奇曾经告诉我：‘我们应该读哪些关于投资的书？’

And actually Peter Lynch once told me over twenty years ago, said to him, What books should we be reading about investing?

他对我说：‘其实，学习打扑克或桥牌更有帮助，因为它教会你应对概率。’

And he said to me, Well, actually learning to play poker or bridge is way more helpful because it teaches you to deal with probabilities.

因为你必须有感觉。

Because you have to feel it.

再详细说说这一点。

Say more about that.

谈论你有六四开的概率，40%的时间会遇到不利结果，这是一回事。

So it's one thing to talk about if you have a sixty forty shot that 40% of the time you're gonna observe a bad outcome.

从概念上理解这一点是一回事。

And to understand that conceptually is one thing.

但亲身体验则是另一回事。

To experience it is another.

我认为我们需要明白的是，有很多事情我们以为自己懂了，其实只是从某种角度——如果借用丹尼尔·卡尼曼的说法——属于系统一和系统二的范畴。

I think that this is one of the things that we need to understand is that there's a whole bunch of things that we think we know because we understand them kind of from a sort of if I borrow from Daniel Kahneman, like, they're system one and system two.

对吧？

Right?

我们大脑中有一部分是更理性的，它负责我们通常所说的思考。

There's the more deliberative part of our brain that's kind of more what we think about thinking about things.

而其余大部分思维则是自动的、本能的。

And then there's most of the rest of our thinking, which is just, you know, automatic or reflexive.

所以，从概念上理解‘有40%的概率我会遇到不利结果’是一回事。

And so there's one thing for me to, like, conceptually get that 40% of the time I'm gonna I'm gonna observe a bad outcome.

但如果我每赌一美元，就有60%的概率赢60美分，我显然会赚大钱。

But if I can grind a dollar, it's a 6 you know, $60.40, I'm obviously gonna make a ton of money.

对吧？

Right?

比如，只要有机会，我每次都愿意用一比三的赔率赌平局。

Like, I'll take three to two on an even, you know, dollar to dollar every single time that I can.

所以我可以在理智上明白，但当你实际下注，以一比三的赔率赌平局却输了，那完全是另一回事。

So I can know that intellectually, but when you experience betting that dollar even money where you're three to two favor and you lose, that is a whole different animal.

真的完全是另一回事。

It really is.

你经常能看到业余玩家和投资者身上出现这种情况。

And you can see with amateur players and and in investors all the time.

他们常说，任何两张牌都有可能赢，但这种情况发生的频率不够高。

This, you know, where they say like, well, you know, any two cards can win, but not enough of the time.

他们忘了这一点。

They they forget that part.

他们会打牌，明明手牌该弃掉，结果剩下的牌发出来后，他们本该赢的。

They'll play like they'll they'll have some sort of hand that they fold and then the rest of the cards will come out and they would have won.

这对他们来说太痛苦了，以至于他们会一直打到牌局结束，因为他们总在想：万一这次就是赢的那一把呢？

And it's so incredibly painful for them that they'll start playing hands till the end because that worry about like, but what if this is the one that wins?

因为这种处境对他们来说实在太难承受了，所以他们就是放不下手中的牌。

Because it's just it's so awful for them to experience that situation that they they won't let go of the hand because of it.

因为当你真的输掉时，那种感觉实在太难以接受了。

Because that feeling of when you actually lose, it's just so it's so hard.

所以当你打了很多扑克之后，就会对这些事情变得非常淡然。

So when you play poker a lot, you just become very sanguine about that stuff.

对吧？

Right?

你只是慢慢学会接受：好吧，这本来就是个六四开的优势。

You just sort of learn like, well, was a sixty forty favorite.

我能怎么办呢？

What was I going to do?

某种程度上，这和埃里克想传达给我的意思是一样的。

Kind of in the same sense of what Eric what that's what Eric was trying to get across to me.

你赢这手牌的概率有81.5%。

You were gonna win the hand 81 and a half percent of the time.

你在说什么啊？

Like, what are you talking about?

再去打一次。

Go play it again.

你会再跟注吗？

Would you call again?

你会不会以完全相同的方式再打这手牌，重复一百次？

Would you play the hand exactly the same way and and run it a 100 times?

当然会。

Of course.

那为什么你只担心这一次呢？

So why are you worried about this one time?

这正是我认为游戏经验带给你的独特价值，它超越了单纯理解策略，真正让你学会如何在不确定的系统中建模他人行为。

And that's the thing that I think that games playing gets for you separate and apart from just sort of like starting to understand the strategy and really starting to figure out how do I model people in these uncertain systems.

扑克是一场漫长的游戏。

Poker is one long game.

如果你没有足够的实战经验，你就永远无法真正掌握它，也无法在这种环境中找到成功的途径。

And if you don't have the reps, you're never going to be able to get that under your belt and try to find a way to success in that environment.

我觉得这真的很难。

I think it's just really hard.

我还记得爱德·索普曾对我说过，就赌博而言，如果我没有优势，我就不会玩。

I remember also Ed Thorpe saying to me, as far as gambling is concerned, if I don't have an edge, I don't play.

我曾问他：那么，我该如何判断自己在投资时是否拥有优势呢？

And I said to him at one point, well, so how can I tell if I have an edge when it comes to investing?

这正是关键所在。

And that's the whole thing.

是的。

Yeah.

他看着我说：除非你有合理的理由相信自己有优势，否则你很可能没有。

And he looks at me and he says, unless you have a rational reason to believe you have an itch, then you probably don't.

你只是听到这些，心里就想：天啊。

And you just sort of hear that and you're like, oh god.

因此，我也从埃德·索普那里学到了这种自律。

And so there's that sort of discipline as well that I've I really learned from Ed Thorpe.

我自己并没有完全应用它，但我学到了一点：不要参与那些你没有胜算的游戏。

I I don't apply it myself, but I learned it, which is simply not to play games that you're not equipped to win.

我实际上想修正一下埃德·索普的说法：除非你有合理的理由相信自己有优势。

I would actually amend what Ed Thorek said about unless you have a rational reason to win that you have an edge.

首先，我认为我们非常擅长欺骗自己，让自己相信我们有合理的理由拥有优势。

So first of all, I think we're very good at fooling ourselves into believing that we have a rational reason that we have an edge.

当我们所处的情境恰好印证了我们对世界已有的信念时，这种情况尤其明显。

And I think that that's particularly so when we're in a situation where the thesis would affirm other things that we already believe about the world.

当我们已经进行了投资时，这种情况尤其突出。

I think it's particularly so when we're already in the investment.

我们需要意识到，每一天当我们醒来查看投资组合时，都是我们可以卖掉组合中所有资产的一天。

One of the things that we need to realize is that every day that we wake up and we're looking at our portfolio is a day that we could sell everything in our portfolio.

不卖出的决定意味着，我相信自己在未来仍然拥有优势。

Decision not to sell is saying, I believe I still have an edge going forward.

但有一点需要明白的是，一旦我们走上某条路，尤其是当我们处于亏损状态时，我们会想尽各种办法说服自己，相信自己在未来仍然拥有理性优势。

And but one of the things to understand is that once we're on a path, particularly if we're in the losses, right, if we have a loss on paper, we're gonna do all sorts of ways to convince ourselves we have a rational reason that we have an edge going forward.

因此，我们需要做的是，为自己建立一些机制，首先帮助我们更好地判断：我们是否真的在理性地开始？

So one of the things that we need to do is like set up structures around us that will allow us first of all to be better at those are we really being rational and starting.

但更重要的是，由于开始的决定总是充满不确定性，我们需要在启动之后，根据新获得的信息来判断：是否应该停止？

But more importantly, because the starting decision is always uncertain, is to say as we discover new information, after we've started, are we stopping?

对吗？

Right?

我们是否在弄清楚何时该停止？

Are we figuring out when we should stop?

因为事实是，一旦我们开始做某件事，我们就非常迟钝，无法注意到那些本应提醒我们停止的信号。

Because it turns out that we're very, very dense when it comes to actually paying attention to the signals after we've started something that we ought to stop it.

而正是在这种情况下，我们变得特别非理性。

And that's where we get particularly irrational.

我认为这真的是非常重要的一点，需要理解。

And I think that that's that's just something really incredibly important to understand.

所以这里有两部分。

So there's two pieces there.

对吧？

Right?

如果你不懂这个游戏，就不要参与。

If you don't understand the game, don't play.

对吧？

Right?

我完全同意这一点。

So I completely agree with that.

我从未持有过任何一枚加密货币，原因是我根本不理解它。

There's a reason why I never owned a single coin because I didn't understand it.

在我人生的某个阶段，我不想去理解它，你知道吗？

I didn't want to understand it at a point in my life where I was like, you know what?

我其实不需要坐下来研究比特币和NFT。

I don't really need to sit down and research Bitcoin and NFTs.

我没有精力去研究它。

I don't have the energy for it.

我不愿意把注意力转向那方面。

I don't want to turn my attention to that.

所以我并不理解它，既然不理解，我就不会参与，我从未投资过，就是因为我不懂。

And so I don't understand it, I'm not going to play I never invested in it just because I didn't understand it.

但我们也需要明白，假设我参与了，我经常听到的一个支持比特币的论点是，它能与通胀脱钩。

But then what we also need to understand is that let's say that I was in it, that one of the arguments that I kept hearing as an example for Bitcoin was that it was going to be uncorrelated with inflation.

好吧。

Okay.

说实话，我对这种说法似乎是一个合理的论点并不了解。

So look, I don't know from anything that that seems like a reasonable thesis.

我们从未经历过任何通胀。

We haven't experienced any inflation.

你很可能有合理的理由认为，由于这一部分特性，比特币与通胀无关，因此你拥有优势。

You probably have a rational reason that you have an edge there because of that piece of the puzzle that it's gonna be uncorrelated.

所以它会在一定程度上对冲通胀。

So it'll act somewhat as a hedge against inflation.

我有什么资格反驳这一点呢？

And who am I to argue with that?

顺便问一下，你又有什么资格反驳这一点呢？

And by the way, who are you to argue with that?

因为这是一种预测，而我们尚未经历通胀。

Because that's a forecast and we haven't experienced inflation yet.

对吧？

Right?

但问题是，如果事实证明它并非与通胀无关，你会怎么做？

But the question is, what do you do when it turns out it's not uncorrelated?

这才是关键问题。

That's the big question.

威廉，我的意思是，这正是我想问你的。

And William, I mean, that's what I would ask you.

当人们发现它并非不相关，而是与通胀高度相关时，他们有在抛售吗？

Were people selling when they figured out it wasn't correlated, that it was very much correlated with inflation?

对大多数人来说，答案是否定的。

The answer for most people is no.

因此，我们需要开始思考这一点：你最好有一个合理的理由，并对这些信号做出理性反应，我认为这一点在做出决策后变得更加重要。

And so that's where we need to start thinking about, that's where that you better have a rational reason and behave rationally to those signals, I think comes into even much more play is post decision.

你在《退出》一书中描述了一种非常有价值的工具，叫做‘退出标准’，这显然与我们正在讨论的内容相关，即提前设定一套止损标准。

So you describe in the book, Quit, a very valuable tool which you call kill criteria, which obviously relates to what we're discussing here, where you develop in advance a set of kill criteria for when to cut your losses.

你能详细谈谈这个，以及我们该如何做吗？

Say, can you talk more about this and how we should do it?

假设我们即将买入一只股票、一只基金或一种加密货币。

Let's say we're about to buy a stock or about to buy a fund or about to buy a cryptocurrency.

你能为我们演示一下如何制定退出标准，建立你所说的‘事前承诺协议’，以便在情况急剧恶化时，你清楚自己该做什么吗？

Can you take us through the process of laying out kill criteria, making what you call a pre commitment contract so that you actually know what you're going to do when things start to go horribly wrong?

所以我们需要认识到，关于何时停止的这些决策。

So here's what we need to realize about these decisions about stopping.

我认为，尤其是对于投资者而言，我们过于关注开始的问题。

I think that we, particularly for investors, we get lots and lots of focus on the starting question.

你买的是什么？

What are you buying?

你决定要交易的论点是什么？

What thesis are you deciding that you actually want to trade?

你想建立哪些头寸？

What positions do you want to put on?

但我们需要更多地关注卖出方面。

But we need to get a lot more focus on the selling side.

我认为我们不太关注这一点的原因之一是，我们有一种直觉，认为如果我们有一个特定的论点，它会暗示某些关于基本面的东西。

And I think that one of the reasons why we don't focus on it so much is that we have an intuition that if we have a particular thesis that implies certain things about say the fundamentals.

未来的基本面会是什么样子？

What what are the fundamentals going to look like in the future?

当这些基本面与我们预期相反时，我们显然会降低风险。

That when those fundamentals move against us, that obviously we're going to take risk off.

我认为，无论是在投资还是其他任何领域，这都是成立的。

And I and I think that that's true whether it's investing or anything else.

对吧？

Right?

比如，我们认为如果跑马拉松时摔断了脚踝，就不会再继续跑了，或者腿出了问题。

Like we think if we run a marathon and we break our ankle, we're not going to run anymore or our leg.

如果我们正在登山，突然暴风雪来临或大雾弥漫，我们就会转身返回。

If we're going up a mountain and a snowstorm comes in or the fog rolls in, we're going to turn around.

如果我们经营一家企业，事情开始一塌糊涂，我们显然会采取行动。

If we have a business and things just start going to crap, that obviously we're going to do something about it.

事实上，数十年来的大量研究表明，当这些信号出现时，我们却并不善于关注它们。

The fact is that just this decades and decades and decades of research shows that we don't, we're not very good at paying attention to those signals when they occur.

以比特币为例，如果你投资比特币，无论是部分还是全部，假设你投资的主要理由是将其作为对抗通胀的对冲工具，因为它与通胀无关。

So with the Bitcoin example, if you're investing in that, let's say in part or maybe in whole, let's say you're the main part of your thesis is I'm using this as a hedge against inflation because it's not going to be correlated with inflation.

是的。

Yeah.

或者一般的金融混乱。

Or financial chaos in general.

如果金融体系开始崩溃，股市开始下跌，它不会与股市相关，而是一种对冲。

If the financial system starts to melt down and stocks start to melt down, it's not going to be correlated with stocks, it's going to be a hedge.

然后突然间一切分崩离析，你会说：‘天哪，这个也在跌。’

Then suddenly everything falls apart and you're like, oh no, this is falling too.

这个也在跌。

This is falling too.

我认为这是因为这是我们假设的一部分，对吧？我们假设，既然这是我们的论点，当未来这些情况发生时，就会成为一个信号，表明我们的论点可能有问题，我们会以理性的方式做出反应，也就是撤掉风险。

I think that because that's part of our thesis, right, we assume that just because it's part of our thesis that when those things occur in the future, that would be a signal that maybe the thesis wasn't on point, that will react to those in a rational way, which would be to take the risk off.

这正是我们的直觉。

That is what we our intuition is.

但同样，几十年甚至上百年的科学研究告诉我们，我们实际上并不会这么做。

But again, decades and decades and decades of science tells us that that is not what we do.

正如你所说，当金融混乱发生、市场崩盘时，比特币也会崩盘。

When, as you say, when financial chaos occurs and things are melting down, Bitcoin melts down too.

那么，人们是否就不再相信比特币了？

Do people then now no longer become Bitcoin believers?

这就是问题所在。

That's the question.

我认为我们已经看到，实际情况根本不是这样。

And I think that we've seen, that's not what happens at all.

我觉得这是一个很好的例子。

I think it's a good example of it.

好的。

Okay.

那么问题来了，我们该如何真正解决这个问题？

The question is then, so how do we actually solve for this problem?

如果我们知道，当信号出现时，我们并不会很好地关注它们——这非常糟糕，因为退出的选择权极其宝贵，因为当你在开始某件事后获得新信息时，退出的选择权让你能够采取行动。

If we know that we're not going to be good at paying attention to the signals when they happen, which is so bad because the option to quit is so incredibly valuable because when you learn new information after you've started something, the option to quit is what lets you do something about it.